Comparison of Physical Therapy and Orthosis on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Medial Knee Osteoarthritis

IF 0.4 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1097/JPO.0000000000000494
Zahra Jiryaei, A. Daryabor, Forouzan Rastgar Koutenaei, M. Khosravi
{"title":"Comparison of Physical Therapy and Orthosis on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Medial Knee Osteoarthritis","authors":"Zahra Jiryaei, A. Daryabor, Forouzan Rastgar Koutenaei, M. Khosravi","doi":"10.1097/JPO.0000000000000494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Orthosis and physical therapy are two conservative managements for knee osteoarthritis (OA), but the question is which is better for alleviating pain and improving function? The aim of this study was to compare two interventions of orthosis and physical therapy on pain and function in patients with knee OA. METHODS In this quasi-experimental study, 31 individuals with medial knee OA were recruited into two groups including orthosis group (combination of insole and brace [n = 14]) and physical therapy group (n = 17). Pain severity was measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire. Also, daily activity was measured by the WOMAC questionnaire at baseline and after 6-week follow-up. Wilcoxon signed rank and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to determine significant difference for intragroup and intergroup comparisons, respectively. RESULTS The orthosis group (using both knee brace and LWLs) had a better result for pain score related to VAS than the physical therapy group immediately after and 6 weeks of using the intervention, with a significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.006). Regarding the WOMAC items including pain and daily activity, both groups had significant differences after the 6-week period of using the intervention, with no significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings, pain and daily activity related to the WOMAC questionnaire were improved in both orthosis and physical therapy groups, with no differences between the two interventions. The orthosis group had better results in pain related to VAS. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The aim of this study was to find whether physical therapy or orthosis best improves pain and function of knee OA patients.","PeriodicalId":53702,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics","volume":"51 16","pages":"54 - 58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0000000000000494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Orthosis and physical therapy are two conservative managements for knee osteoarthritis (OA), but the question is which is better for alleviating pain and improving function? The aim of this study was to compare two interventions of orthosis and physical therapy on pain and function in patients with knee OA. METHODS In this quasi-experimental study, 31 individuals with medial knee OA were recruited into two groups including orthosis group (combination of insole and brace [n = 14]) and physical therapy group (n = 17). Pain severity was measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire. Also, daily activity was measured by the WOMAC questionnaire at baseline and after 6-week follow-up. Wilcoxon signed rank and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to determine significant difference for intragroup and intergroup comparisons, respectively. RESULTS The orthosis group (using both knee brace and LWLs) had a better result for pain score related to VAS than the physical therapy group immediately after and 6 weeks of using the intervention, with a significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.006). Regarding the WOMAC items including pain and daily activity, both groups had significant differences after the 6-week period of using the intervention, with no significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings, pain and daily activity related to the WOMAC questionnaire were improved in both orthosis and physical therapy groups, with no differences between the two interventions. The orthosis group had better results in pain related to VAS. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The aim of this study was to find whether physical therapy or orthosis best improves pain and function of knee OA patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
物理治疗和矫形器对膝关节内侧骨关节炎患者临床疗效的影响比较
ABSTRACT 引言矫形器和物理疗法是膝关节骨性关节炎(OA)的两种保守治疗方法,但问题是哪种方法更能减轻疼痛和改善功能?本研究旨在比较矫形器和物理疗法两种干预措施对膝关节 OA 患者疼痛和功能的影响。方法 在这项准实验研究中,31 名内侧膝关节 OA 患者被分成两组,包括矫形器组(鞋垫和支架的组合 [n = 14])和物理治疗组(n = 17)。疼痛严重程度通过视觉模拟量表(VAS)和西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)问卷进行测量。此外,WOMAC 问卷还测量了基线和 6 周随访后的日常活动量。Wilcoxon 符号秩和 Mann-Whitney U 检验分别用于确定组内和组间比较的显著差异。结果 使用矫形器组(同时使用护膝和 LWLs)在使用干预措施后立即和 6 周后的 VAS 疼痛评分结果优于物理治疗组,两组间差异显著(P = 0.006)。至于包括疼痛和日常活动在内的 WOMAC 项目,两组在干预 6 周后均有显著差异,组间无显著差异。结论 根据研究结果,矫形器组和物理治疗组的 WOMAC 问卷中与疼痛和日常活动相关的项目均有所改善,两组间无差异。矫形器组在与 VAS 相关的疼痛方面效果更好。临床意义 本研究旨在找出物理治疗和矫形器对膝关节 OA 患者疼痛和功能改善的最佳方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics
Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Published quarterly by the AAOP, JPO: Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics provides information on new devices, fitting and fabrication techniques, and patient management experiences. The focus is on prosthetics and orthotics, with timely reports from related fields such as orthopaedic research, occupational therapy, physical therapy, orthopaedic surgery, amputation surgery, physical medicine, biomedical engineering, psychology, ethics, and gait analysis. Each issue contains research-based articles reviewed and approved by a highly qualified editorial board and an Academy self-study quiz offering two PCE''s.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Physical Therapy and Orthosis on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Medial Knee Osteoarthritis Blood Pressure Regulation in Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation: Effects of Wearing a Prosthesis Motion Analysis of a Frontal Plane Adaptable Prosthetic Foot Immediate Effect of Soft Lumbosacral Orthosis on Trunk Stability and Upper-Limb Functionality in Children with Cerebral Palsy Importance of Health Policy and Systems Research for Strengthening Rehabilitation in Health Systems: A Call to Action to Accelerate Progress.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1